Top Clicks

Meta

Since when did Best Buy become like a used car dealership? Actually, I’d now rather go to a used car dealership.

I needed to get a new tripod for my cameras. I had done some online research and had narrowed down my options to two models. I wanted to physically look at the two models and proceeded to the camera department.

I was in the store no more than 5 minutes total – that includes checking out and inspecting the tripods. Within the first minute I was approached by two sales people (and yes, they were sales people not just workers.) I am a social person, but I don’t usually engage in extended conversation with a sales person unless I initiate it. I was asked by both associates (who were not more than 5 feet apart) what kind of camera I had and I got the idea they wanted to have a longer conversation. I was trying to read the package and inspect the equipment – they were getting annoying. They got the hint that I was fine and scampered off to accost other customers.

Right after this, I had someone come up to me asking if I had heard about the in-store promotion. I stated nicely that I was not interested in anything but the item I was looking at. He too, thanked me and went off looking for other prey. I get the idea of providing good customer service, but I felt that this bordered on the annoying.

I have shopped at Best Buy for years and I remember when they were the “Bait and Switch” place back in the 80’s. The bait and switch seems to have gone, but they have brought back the annoying salespeople. If I can go somewhere else for these items (or shop online at another vendor,) I will. These tactics will be the end of Best Buy one day.

I have great respect for law enforcement personnel. They do the difficult job of protecting the law-abiding citizens from those dirt bags that decide to break the law. Many times this dedication puts the officer in danger, but they do it anyway. For that I applaud all police officers and others in related professions.

This past weekend, we have witnessed an incredible tragedy with the shooting in Arizona by a complete mad man hell-bent on killing a US Representative. We’ve also witnessed an incredible amount of political gamesmanship and opportunism. Attacks on leaders of the conservative movement like Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh should have been expected. It should not have been expected to come from the Sheriff of Pima County, Clarence Dupnik.

We’ve all watched how good law enforcement personnel handle situations like this – they give the media certain information about the case with parsed details. They generally don’t comment on who is the cause before the FACTS come in and definitely don’t express their opinion. Well, Sheriff Dupnik decided to use his 15-minutes of fame to his advantage and in the process became a darling of all the left-wing kooks.

Here’s a short video from an interview with Diane Sawyer:

Here’s another one:

And here’s how it went when Keith Olbermann interviewed the Sheriff:

Well there you go. This guy had an agenda from the very start. How despicable. If he’s mentioning those on the right, why not mention hate and vitriol on the left? I’ve been to several Tea Party events and have taken both of my kids to a couple. I’ve not witnessed anything hateful or despicable at any of these events and if I had, those present would have taken action.

I hope the voters of Pima County remember how ineffective this guy is and vote him out at the next election.

The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:

The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.

Crunchy numbers

The average container ship can carry about 4,500 containers. This blog was viewed about 15,000 times in 2010. If each view were a shipping container, your blog would have filled about 3 fully loaded ships.

In 2010, there were 37 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 277 posts. There were 11 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 754kb. That’s about a picture per month.

This post is mainly for my fellow Illinois residents as well as those planning to travel in our great socialist state.

Did you know that it is illegal to use your cell phone in Illinois while passing through a construction zone? I, unfortunately, found out the hard way while traveling on I-55 south on my way back to St. Louis. Since Illinois is mostly all a construction zone, this means you can only use your phone between mile marker 112 and 115. Better talk quick!

Was I using my cell phone in a construction zone? Yes. I was actually calling home to let them know I was going to be late because of miles and miles of construction where I saw no one working. Yeah, I know, the law has nothing to do with the health and well-being of the construction workers, it’s all about the safety of the other drivers, right?

Here is the statute from ILCS 625 ILCS 5/12‑610.1

(e) A person, regardless of age, may not use a wireless telephone at any time while operating a motor vehicle on a roadway in a school speed zone established under Section 11‑605, or on a highway in a construction or maintenance speed zone established under Section 11‑605.1. This subsection (e) does not apply to (i) a person engaged in a highway construction or maintenance project for which a construction or maintenance speed zone has been established under Section 11‑605.1, (ii) a person using a wireless telephone for emergency purposes, including, but not limited to, law enforcement agency, health care provider, fire department, or other emergency services agency or entity, (iii) a law enforcement officer or operator of an emergency vehicle when performing the officer’s or operator’s official duties, or (iv) to a person using a wireless telephone in voice‑activated mode.

I spent the week in several areas of Illinois and the last month in several other states. I have seen some signs as I entered construction zones that indicated that cell phone use is prohibited in this area but could not remember what state or area prohibited it, and if so, why. No such sign existed before entering any of the dozen or so construction zones while traveling down I-55 from Chicago to St. Louis. Bad luck for me, as I’ll be out $120 for the ticket.

Illinois is broke. The state cannot afford to give the money to our schools that we as residents so graciously give each year in property taxes. Why should I be surprised to find out I broke a law that I didn’t know about? Heck, I didn’t even know I couldn’t use my phone in a school zone, unless of course I have a hands free device. Both are distracting, truth be told.

So if you are driving through Illinois, watch out. Put the cell phone down while in a construction zone and watch out for those ticket happy state troopers. Remember, they have to fund all the wonderful programs for the state!

The title is a little hard hitting, but what of the idea that Mr. Obama is the worst president in our countries history? I generally give that title to Mr. Carter for his numerous bunglings of the economy, Iranian hostage situation, etc. Maybe Nixon could be on that list for his crookedness while in office. Questions to ponder, for sure.

Below is an excerpt from an article written R. Emmett Tyrrell, a columnist for The Washington Times, that explores that very subject.

It is becoming apparent for all to see that a man who made his name as a community organizer does not have the skills to be president of these United States. Maybe he could develop the requisite skills as a governor. Possibly he could develop such skills were he to sit in the Senate for a couple of terms. Yet there are delicate sensitivities, the ability to listen, to stick by your guns, occasionally to remain reticent. These are the fundamentals of a leader, and President Obama has demonstrated that he lacks all of them, most notably reticence. I think it is clear even to official Washington that Mr. Obama is the worst president of modern times. President Jimmy Carter is redeemed.

Indeed, Jimmy Carter is redeemed. Mr. Tyrrell goes on to make the case that Mr. Obama seems to insert himself into silly controversies based not on being prudent (i.e. Professor Henry Gates, ala “The Beer Summit”), but rather impulsive in nature.

There is a solid reason that we usually seek individuals who have proven themselves in an executive role first. In a governmental position, this usually means a gubernatorial role (Bush 43, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Nixon…) At the least, the person needs to have some kind of experience managing an organization and a large group of people. Obama does not have that quality and we are getting what we deserve by electing such an individual. Heck, he barely had any experience in the Senate (hardly a training ground for executives.)

Those on the other side are quick to point out that he has helped pass comprehensive health care legislation, ended the war in Iraq and has attempted to “fix” the errors of the Bush Administration. Right. While I was not an enthusiastic fan of President Bush, I think he had a much better grasp on how to govern than Mr. Obama. This has nothing to do with his politics, but rather the way he attempts to manage people.

Let’s bring this down to a level all of us could understand. Not all corporations are run equally. Some are good and some are bad, management wise. Well run companies and corporations have a chain of command where the executive hires individuals to serve under them (i.e. Vice Presidents) and then there are people under those individuals that do specific jobs and so on and so forth. This is a top down structure that allows the employees to do their jobs and report to a specific boss. The CEO or President answers to a board that is entrusted to make sure things don’t go awry.

Then there are the micromanagement firms. These firms usually include a dynamic individual that feels compelled to insert themselves into all areas of the operation. This may sound like a great way to gain the trust of the employees, but in reality, it hinders and stifles productivity and creative behaviors. People start to wonder who is the boss. It is terribly inefficient. Eventually this type of corporation will wither due to distrust of the employees and paranoia of the chief executive. Eventually the corporation crumbles under the ineffective management. The smart boards will fire the chief executive and try to repair the damage caused before the company ceases to exist.

I have had experience with both types of organizations (I’ve actually seen both types happen within the same company.) The first is more appropriate for a large organization. Hire the best people and let them do their job. Ronald Reagan used to say about the Soviets, “Trust but verify.” A great mantra to live by in any corporate or governmental environment.

Mr. Obama has a problem with his management skills. He’s a very good and charismatic speaker, but that quality does not lead to a good leader.

Mr. Tyrrell ended his article with these lines:

Increasingly, it is clear that the Democrats brought down on the country a community organizer as president. Maybe in the future they will consider experience a qualification for the presidency. Possibly, the age of charisma is behind us. Possibly, Mr. Obama even lacks that dubious quality.

I have no other information on this other than this video, but how can this actually go through the courts as valid. 1 Latino person = 6 votes? That would be like me going into an area that includes a population that is mostly black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. and demand that my vote be counted more because I’m a pasty white male.

Back during the 2008 election, there was at least one polling place (and probably a bunch more) where Philadelphia Black Panthers were intimidating potential voters. The DOJ decided to drop the voter corruption case against the New Black Panther Party. Why? Because they are a black organization (that means no white folks allowed.) No crime with the membership requirement – the crime is with the voter intimidation.

Here is a great video highlighting Samir Shabazz. Sorry, I meant to say KING Samir Shabazz. My bad!

What a great example of a massive racist (you know, you don’t have to be white to be a racist!) I wonder what would have happened if some white dude said that white people should kill some black people. It already happens – all of us white dudes look down on the White Power and KKK garbage. They are all racist rednecks.

Mr. Shabazz, er, sorry, KING Shabazz has every right to spout his hateful rhetoric, just like all the racist white dudes. This is America, if you want to hate your brother for the color of his skin, that is allowed. No crime there. I don’t agree with that thinking, but there is not a crime there.